I have never used a Groupon. And there are plenty of nightmarish stories about how they kill small businesses. No big news here folks — it’s going, going, gone.
But not the model.
It should actually be out there reviving newspapers. That’s kind of a non-sequitur. Let me explain:
I was talking to my older friend who was a former editor and columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer about how to save newspapers. He’s kind of a media curmudgeon (sorry AC!) so he didn’t quite get — or consider — the following — I’m curious to hear what you all think:
Let’s allow people — and even newspaper professionals — to post suggested stories — just like Groupons are posted and with the same gamification. Like this: People who are interested in a story can pledge some money to it, and when a level of interest and financial support is achieved, the story gets kicked off and assigned to a reporter (or a pre-assigned reporter).
This would give readers editorial pull — and it gives newspapers a business model tied to performance. Practically and financially speaking, I’d rather (or likely) spend $300 in small increments across a year, investing in particular stories or reportage rather than spend $50 on an annual subscription for content that often never connects with my interests.
I love local news — but I’m always frustrated that the ratio of good content to bad content + fluff is 1:100.
So, is the Groupon model just a model? And if it is, can it be the thing that saves journalism? It might just be able to de-couple the content-advertising dependency that has corrupted journalism.
Who’s checking the world’s most referenced crowdsourced repository of knowledge?
I love crowdsourcing — but with the pretext of “fact” I think Wikipedia should be paying for third-party inspections.
For example, what percent of science-related articles are error free?
The results of this evaluation should be on every page?
Today, I asked Kathleen, my sensible dental hygienist, how the “dentist business” was going.
I honestly didn’t expect the answer I got — I assumed that folks’ teeth would be one of those “recession proof” things. At least regular check ups and cleanings.
Not the case: “It’s been different… worst recession I can remember,” she said.
According to her, my region’s dentists and their office staff are reporting “not even getting their co-pays”.
That’s not good — and for a multitude of obvious reasons — but here’s a different way to think of it:
For all the official economic stats out there, and specifically the “leading economic indicators“, those stats like the “Average weekly jobless claims for unemployment insurance” and the “The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index” that supposedly represent the trajectory of the economy, there’s probably not one that is as straight forward and tangible as the nascent one implied by my anecdote: are the folks in your town skimping on basic health maintenance?
I think it’s fair to say that it might be time to think about changing that phrase, “All politics is local”, to “All economics Is local”.
If we want folks to understand the state of the economy, why start with national, abstract measurements? Why not anchor it to the folks in your town?
Actually, I’ve been meaning to write about this concept for a while… Way back in 2009, I noticed that when I went to the bank I’d see a lot more people than normal with their change baskets at the counting machines — dumping change, waiting patiently, dumping more, waiting and then finally taking the paper print out to the counter.
I had the fleeting thought back then that it would be really interesting to see the data regarding the usage of those machines?
My thesis: you could gauge the anxiety or budget stress families were having in a region by measuring the frequency and volume of change redemption across banks.
Who ever thought the change in the couch could give you so much insight?
Tim Burton — you know, Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorhands, Batman — well, there’s a great article on NYTimes.com — Tim Burton, at Home in His Own Head — that synthesizes, via a simple anecdote, a few key subjects I’m interested in:
- Child development
- U.S. culture
“If you look at children’s drawings, they’re all great. And then at a certain point, even when they’re about 7 or 8 or 9, they go, “Oh, I can’t draw.” Well, yes, you can. I went through that same thing, even when I started to go to CalArts, and a couple of teachers said: “Don’t worry about it. If you like to draw, just draw.” And that just liberated me. My mother wasn’t an artist, but she made these weird owls out of pine cones, or cat needlepoint things. There’s an outlet for everyone, you know?”
Thank you Tim Burton for making a few things prophetically clear:
- Don’t limit yourself. Do new stuff. Even if it’s ‘weird’ or not your typical thing. Your life depends on it.
- Kids do best when they get to follow their instincts.
- A culture that compulsively values (demands!) grandiose perfection — Lady Gaga or bust — is headed towards irrelevance.
- Innovation stems from having freedom to roam and having the freedom to produce “mediocre” stuff.
When my kids (5 and 3) say “I’m going to be an artist when I grow up!” I say proudly: “Well, that would be the finest thing one could ever be.”
To be clear: it’s not that I envision them in an art gallery or behind a drum kit. It’s not the profession that I care about — it’s the mindset… the mindset that looks through boundaries — or doesn’t even see them at all.
So, let’s make some weird owls out of pine cones, shall we?
Follow Tim on Twitter.
Just took the girls out to breakfast at the Classic Diner in Malvern, PA and besides having great food and a zany time, I had a social media epiphany after seeing this:
Social media – a half start
Kudos for the Classic Diner for getting their social media Calls-to-Action (CTA) on their receipts–a great engagement point–but they should have gone a step further. But, really, it’s not all their fault–the industry has to step up a bit too. Let me explain:
The restaurant could have added short URLs–or better yet a QR code (although this would have precluded perhaps having two CTAs). But what would really create a tipping point is a one-step action that creates a better connection to the consumer. I think two things have to happen:
1. Mobile phones have to build QR tech right into the camera.
2. Businesses have to focus and decide what their engagement goal is.
If I had my way, Classic Diner clients would see a QR code on this receipt and by snapping a photo of it they would automatically ‘like’ the restaurant on Facebook. Or, better than that, they would sign up to receive direct–perhaps even custom–offers right from the restaurant.
Bottom line: businesses should make the connection experience radically simple and super meaningful.
Reviewers of the world it’s time to start getting paid.
There’s something wrong with the state of the internet. In particular, reviews.
We write them. We look through them. We rely on them!—even when they’re written by total strangers. They provide enormous value to internet users worldwide. They’ve transformed ecommerce. Yet we don’t own what we write.
Can’t we snap our fingers and ask the silicon valley rainmakers to take the democratic ethos of the internet one step further and give individuals automatic intellectual property rights for the content we create?
Pinterest is almost there.
It allows users to curate what matters to them—but it doesn’t let us get paid if our curation brings value to a company or organization. I do recall them surreptitiously trying to swap out user-pasted urls with affiliate-laden ones. Hmm. Good idea–bad execution.
Gumroad is making waves by making any link an ecommerce storefront. Not sure if this can be executed as a default in one’s ‘lifestream’.
Yotpo is doing something interesting–using algorithms (what else!?) to find the best reviews for any product. And, Yotpo, will the writer of that ‘best review’ get something in return?
And then there is VRM–or Vendor Relationship Management. There’s lots of interesting things over there–for example, a few of their goals:
- Make individuals the collection centers for their own data
- Give individuals the ability to share data selectively
- Give individuals the ability to control how their data is used by others
It’s good to know we’re heading in the right direction. Heck, there may be a startup being featured right this very instance who has solved the problem.
Regardless–let’s decide to turn the corner together and demand ownership of our thoughts and social content.
Good, little vid over on TechCrunch about Nicholas Sparks, the bestselling novelist and screenwriter (The Notebook and A Walk To Remember), on how, and more importantly why, he uses social media.
He says something almost in passing that is so critical about social media that often gets missed. Here he is (around 10:24):
“I have close to 1.2M fans on Facebook, for instance. That is my platform so to speak. It’s interesting. It’s a wonderful thing in that I’ve had 5000 articles written about me over the years. I’ve sat through 5000 interviews, right? Virtually every one has errors in them. Just little things. So this is your own platform. You can be who you need to be here.”
This is something that just did not exist before social media–that didn’t exist in earnest even 5 years ago.
Essentially, Sparks creates and directs his own interviews for his fans. This level of control and direct participation is really amazing.
And here’s the video:
I’m new to Douglas Rushkoff, but I’m digging what he’s saying over on FastCompany about the state of ‘brands’ and the future (now!) of marketing.
In short, ditch the inflated and created ‘branding’ that takes place at your org–just be transparent and really good at what you do. BTW: One good example of this is MailChimp.
Rushkoff On “Brands”
[But] it’s not about creating a mythology around the way a product was created, so it’s no longer “these were cookies made by elves in a hollow tree.” That’s not the value of the brand. The value of the brand is where did this actually come from? What’s in this cookie? Who made it? Are Malaysian children losing their fingers in the cookie press or is this being made by happy cookie culture people? At that point, all these companies come to people like me saying, “We want to become transparent. We want a transparent communication strategy.” And I’m like “Well, are you proud of what’s going on inside your company? Are you proud enough to pull up the shades and let people see inside?” It’s that easy.
Every company has a social media strategy whether they know it or not. You can have your dedicated social media person chasing down consumer complaints, but your real social media strategy is how are the people who work at your company and the people who buy from your company and people who supply to your company, how are they talking about you in social media? The way to make them talk about you [favorably] is by walking the walk of the thing that you do. And that’s so hard for so many of these companies because they’ve become so abstracted. They’ve become so distanced from the core competence of their industry. The job of a communicator–or someone like me–is to go in and say, well, just do something. Don’t outsource one thing and then make your company about that.”
Rushkoff On Marketing
In response to: “What will marketing organizations look like in the future?”
It will be companies that figure out how to communicate the non-fiction story of a company, so it’s going to look a lot more like a communications company than a creative branding agency. It’s going to look a little bit more like PR, in some sense. It’s going to be people who go and figure out what does your company do and how do we let the world know about that? There’s going to be a lot of psychology involved, except instead of it being psychologists turned against the consumer, it’s going to be psychologists going in and trying to convince companies that what they’re doing is worthy. It’s breaking down this false need in companies to hide from the public what they’re doing–except for the ones that do (need to hide).
We’re getting back to the basics–and I like it.
So if you’re a marketing or web type, you most likely saw Google’s unprecedented video of its search meeting:
Video! The search quality meeting, uncut (annotated)
This really is awesome for a number of reasons:
The first–and most obvious–thing is that Google is being more transparent around its highly secretive search “recipe”. It’s showing anybody who is interested what kind of meticulousness and rigor go into decisions to improve search.
The second thing, and the thing that matters more to me as a marketer, is that Google is showing what good SEO–and what good marketing–is all about: producing great content. This video, is not professionally produced, nor is it staged or scripted. It’s just an honest peek inside their meeting.
So this is my observation: lots of firms have a treasure trove of good “content” happening every day in their company: it could be an epiphany regarding product development, or an anecdote from a client service rep about outstanding service, or a story about how useful a customer found a product… The take away is that marketing doesn’t always have to be the production of brand new “marketing” content, it can simply be opening the doors to show the real people behind the work, products and company.
Kudos to Google for walking the talk.
If there has ever been an analog-t0-digital snafu worth solving, it’s the small biz email newsletter sign up form.
How many times have you seen those little note books covered in pizza sauce, jammed-up on the counter, closed or otherwise being ineffective and uninviting? It screams: “We’ll never add these to anything and you’ll never get an email from us!”
That’s why MailChimp’s Chimpadeedoo is my hero. Looky here:
That’s a sweet iPad rendering of their new technology. With auto-sync to their email platform, MailChimp has elegantly left small biz folk with a sweet opportunity: to actually communicate with their clients via email.
There’s no reason anymore not to do it.
Technology that makes things suuuuuuper easy takes the cake every time.
Are you thinking what I’m thinking?
If Google can create a car that chauffeurs you around safely, then I think it’s safe to assume that they will tap into Google Maps—along with their traffic stats—to optimize your drive.
BUT IT GETS BETTER!
What if Google could then get all local, state and federal governments to create and provide access to traffic light systems?
Isn’t it conceivable that Google could totally optimize the world’s driving, reducing congestion, saving gas, time, wear and tear on cars???
They’re applying the Google Optimizer philosophy to driving.
Actually, I walk to work, but would welcome a world with fewer cars, creating less gas, fewer accidents, and people in cars less.